Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
]] Matthias Urlichs > Hi, > > Tollef Fog Heen: > > Matthias Urlichs > > > Too true. This GR does not have winners. We all lost. > > > > No, we all won. We won because we said that «we have processes for > > this». > > We do have processes for this, but the interaction of reasonable people and > working processes with not-so-reasonable people (note that I'm not blaming > a specific "side" here) definitely resulted in misguided (ab?)use of our > processes (in the opinion of a large majority of developers) -- altogether > an experience I wouldn't want to repeat any time soon. If ever. :-/ Yes, in this case it was one of those cases where one group wanted to (and my apologies for the war-like metaphor here) call in the heavy artillery. The project said «no, we have better mechanisms for this». That's certainly a course correction, but that's fine. > So, yes we «won» in the sense that the mandate to get over our mutual > pigheadedness and start to bloody *talk* to each other was sent loud and > clear (let's hope it'll be received), but along the way we lost a heap of > trust in each other which will have to be regained. It's not only a mandate, it's a directive. It's the metaphorical parent going «why are you running to me to solve this problem? You know how to fix this already!». > > I sure hope we are. It won't be easy, but I think we are. If I didn't, > > I'd not have been here still. > > Same here. > > Well. Enough of that. Back to getting actual work done! ;-) Yupyup. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87sihd8rsq@xoog.err.no
Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
Hi, Tollef Fog Heen: > Matthias Urlichs > > Too true. This GR does not have winners. We all lost. > > No, we all won. We won because we said that «we have processes for > this». We do have processes for this, but the interaction of reasonable people and working processes with not-so-reasonable people (note that I'm not blaming a specific "side" here) definitely resulted in misguided (ab?)use of our processes (in the opinion of a large majority of developers) -- altogether an experience I wouldn't want to repeat any time soon. If ever. :-/ So, yes we «won» in the sense that the mandate to get over our mutual pigheadedness and start to bloody *talk* to each other was sent loud and clear (let's hope it'll be received), but along the way we lost a heap of trust in each other which will have to be regained. > I sure hope we are. It won't be easy, but I think we are. If I didn't, > I'd not have been here still. > Same here. Well. Enough of that. Back to getting actual work done! ;-) -- -- Matthias Urlichs signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
]] Matthias Urlichs > Russ Allbery: > > A lot of that analysis concludes that the pro-systemd "side" in Debian > > won some sort of conclusive victory. > > I have a different perspective. > > Too true. This GR does not have winners. We all lost. Not as a result of > this vote, bus because of the incessant arguing, trolling, and mixing up > of personal preferences and angsts with technical merits and bugs which > preceded and accompanied it. > (It also caused a couple of people to quit who shouldn't have had to.) No, we all won. We won because we said that «we have processes for this». We won because we as a project said «we are responsible and trust each other to be excellent and work together for the best solutions for everybody». We won because we rejected making technical policy through political processes. There were sacrifices along the way. This isn't an easy won victory, and we'll all be sore and tender for a while while we regain our balance and find out how to best move forward together. > > Are we up to the challenge? > > > Personally I doubt we are, and I'm not necessarily excepting myself from > that judgement. > > But we should strive to be. I sure hope we are. It won't be easy, but I think we are. If I didn't, I'd not have been here still. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87egsyc5iq@xoog.err.no
Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery writes: Russ> I have a different perspective. Russ> I think we just had a GR in which the Debian developer Russ> community said that we, as a community, would like to work Russ> through all of the issues around init systems together, as a Russ> community, rather than having any one side of the argument win Russ> unambiguously and impose its views on those who disagree. I agree strongly when I read your message. I feel a thrill of excitement when I think about the challenge we've placed before ourselves, because I imagine a world in which we eventually turn this into a victory for working together and for respecting diverse views. I hope those of us who voted for option 4 rise to this challenge. Having asked to work together using our normal processes, I request that we work to make sure that the way we communicate and work together is up to that task. In another message, Matthias Urlichs wrote: >Too true. This GR does not have winners. We all lost. Not as a result of >this vote, bus because of the incessant arguing, trolling, and mixing up >of personal preferences and angsts with technical merits and bugs which >preceded and accompanied it. We choose whether we win or lose. There's been a huge sacrifice in terms of pain and energy spent. We today can choose whether that's a loss, or whether that provides energy to work together with respect and understanding. We can choose whether to turn all that pain into an nuanced solution to the technical issues better than anything that could fit on a ballot combined with a community that has greater confidence in its ability to work together. --Sam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/0149cced8948-18db9e1f-e174-4eea-a20b-3db3e90c7f2a-000...@email.amazonses.com
Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
Hi. Holger Levsen writes: > On Mittwoch, 19. November 2014, Russ Allbery wrote: >> I originally posted this in a thread on debian-private, but on further >> reflection it seems appropriate for a broader audience. > > my reply there: "lovely words, thanks a wow". > +1 FWIW Best regards, -- Olivier BERGER http://www-public.telecom-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/ - OpenPGP-Id: 2048R/5819D7E8 Ingenieur Recherche - Dept INF Institut Mines-Telecom, Telecom SudParis, Evry (France) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87fvdeqowq@inf-11879.int-evry.fr
Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
Hi, Russ Allbery: > A lot of that analysis concludes that the pro-systemd "side" in Debian > won some sort of conclusive victory. > I have a different perspective. > Too true. This GR does not have winners. We all lost. Not as a result of this vote, bus because of the incessant arguing, trolling, and mixing up of personal preferences and angsts with technical merits and bugs which preceded and accompanied it. (It also caused a couple of people to quit who shouldn't have had to.) The GR just stated that the majority (of those who voted, but I seriously doubt that the other half feel any different) is sick and tired of all that. I didn't expect #4 to win, esp. given that the reason it was even on the ballot felt sortof whimsical at the time (at least to me) … but I think I'm glad it did. > In other words, the way I choose to look at this GR is that the project as > a whole just voted to take away the sticks that we were using to beat each > other with. > I wouldn't go as far as say "take away", but the message to use a talking stick instead is clear enough. For those to whom talking sticks are out of cultural scope: a group sits in a circle and one person holds the talking stick. That person talks. Everybody else *listens*. Not superficially, and not just to the literal words. Then the stick gets passed on to the next person who wants to speak. Repeat until consensus is reached. > Are we up to the challenge? > Personally I doubt we are, and I'm not necessarily excepting myself from that judgement. But we should strive to be. -- -- Matthias Urlichs signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Interpreting the init system GR results
On Mittwoch, 19. November 2014, Russ Allbery wrote: > I originally posted this in a thread on debian-private, but on further > reflection it seems appropriate for a broader audience. my reply there: "lovely words, thanks a wow". really, thanks for expressing this this way. My thoughts exactly, but totally lacking these words... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
